FPL Copilot

Find players by expected points

find_players

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this to find the best Fantasy Premier League (fantasy football) players to pick or buy, by fplcopilot expected points (xPts, also called predicted or projected points), filtered by position, price, club or ownership, and sorted by points, value per £m, or as low-owned differentials. Classic FPL, not FPL Draft.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "find_players"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sort`	No	xpts (default), value (xPts per £m) or differential (low-owned)	xpts
`team`	No	Club, e.g. ARS or Arsenal
`limit`	No	How many players (1-15)
`horizon`	No	How many gameweeks ahead to count (1-8).
`position`	No	Position: GK, DEF, MID or FWD
`max_price`	No	Max price in £m, e.g. 8.0
`min_price`	No	Min price in £m
`max_ownership`	No	Max ownership %, e.g. 10 for differentials

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed9 schema fields changedOct 2, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / horizon / maximum
```
Removed value: -8
```
removedInput schema / properties / horizon / minimum
```
Removed value: -1
```

changedInput schema / properties / limit / description

Previous value: -"How many players (max 15)"New value: +"How many players (1-15)"

removedInput schema / properties / limit / maximum
```
Removed value: -15
```
removedInput schema / properties / limit / minimum
```
Removed value: -1
```

changedInput schema / properties / position / anyOf

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "enum": [
-      "GK",
-      "DEF",
-      "MID",
-      "FWD"
-    ],
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "maxLength": 24,
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

changedInput schema / properties / position / description

Previous value: -"Position"New value: +"Position: GK, DEF, MID or FWD"

removedInput schema / properties / sort / enum

Removed value: -[
-  "xpts",
-  "value",
-  "differential"
-]

addedInput schema / properties / sort / maxLength
```
Added value: +24
```

First observedSep 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower. The description adds useful context beyond that: the xPts methodology, what a 'differential' means (low-owned), and the Classic-vs-Draft scope. Return format is not described, but it's a filtered list, so the gap is minor.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence beginning with 'Use this to find...' that packs purpose, filters, sort modes and scope without waste. Dense but every clause contributes; slightly long to parse in one breath.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only, all-optional-filter list tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, filters, sorting and scope well. Only a brief note on what the results contain is missing, which is acceptable given the tool's simplicity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so all eight parameters are already documented. The description paraphrases the same filters (position, price, club, ownership) and sort modes without adding syntax or constraints beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (find), resource (FPL players), and ranking method (fplcopilot expected points / xPts), plus the available filters and sort modes. An agent can distinguish it from compare_players or get_player immediately.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives clear context ('find the best players to pick or buy') and a scope exclusion ('Classic FPL, not FPL Draft'). It does not explicitly name alternatives like compare_players or get_player, so routing is implied rather than spelled out.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All FPL Copilot tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?